memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Memory Alpha:Category suggestions
Provisional categories Organizations I propose the creation of a supercategory "Organizations" -- this would basically be any group, including governments, corporations, militaries, teams, etc. Form *Supercategory: Category:Organizations -- this category contains all organizations articles in a list **Subcategories can be added at will from the following: ***Category:Governments ***Category:Corporations ***Category:Agencies -- covering both militaries, and governmental sub-agencies ****Category:Military units -- proposed at Memory Alpha:Category suggestions ***additional categories for other groups as they become identified -- i'm not sure if we have enough articles relevant for a Category:Music groups or Category:Sports teams, *** Category:Religions might be a possibility The question about this suggestion is -- should all these articles still be contained in the master category, or should we leave the supercategory containing only articles about "miscellaneous groups" that don't fall into any of the subcategories -- or would it even be preferable to create additional subcategory Category:Miscellaneous groups. Additionally, subcategories of major groups can and will be created upon suggestion and vote here -- once Category:Agencies has been approved, Category:Starfleet, Category:Tal Shiar, etcetera can be contained in it. :I don't recommend putting any articles in Category:Starfleet or any other organization at this level, however, because an additional tree structure must be discussed -- to prevent double listing articles that fall under both '''UFP' and Starfleet.'' There are a lot of organizations that may be deserving of a category heading -- this level will form a major portion of our tree structure if it is approved. Once approved, it will be easy to create multiple categories by writing one sample category makeup -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 21:49, 26 Mar 2005 (EST) :(I'm not sure where this came from, but it didn't belong with the paragraph prevously attached with it, so I am putting it here.) --Alan del Beccio 06:50, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC) *Subcategories based on military or service organizations, agencies, (Category:Organizations; Category:Agencies; etc), will use the form "NAME personnel". Former members who move on to other exploits may be double categorized. Members of sub-agencies or units that are able to be listed like that should also be categorized like that. -- for example, Spock is both in Starfleet personnel, and USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) personnel. *Subcategories based on species should take the form of their list article (people) -- the species name in plural (Category:Vulcans, humans, etc). Hybrids should be double categorized. *Subcategories based on Category:Governments or Category:Regions could take the form NAME citizens or NAME residents, i'm open for suggestions on this one if anyone has a better idea for final terminology. Earth Category:Earth. with list subcategory Category:Earth cities. The cities category would cover the numerous Earth cities mentioned, and the broader Earth category would cover other aspects of the planet -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 23:22, 8 Mar 2005 (GMT) * would additional subcategory Category:Earth regions be prefereable for all of our nation, state and continent/island articles? * further subcategories could be applied for Category:Earth lifeforms. * would this be an opening for our first Category:People species category - a Category:Humans listing? :Does anyone have any further input whether or not i should create these categories? -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 10:19, 13 Mar 2005 (GMT) * Perhaps just a category of cities, to encompass both earth and alien cities, much like Category:Starships encompasses all starships Starfleet, and alien. Additionally, a category of regions to cover all states, counties, provinces, nations, regions, islands, etc. and -- a category of landforms for all mountains, continents, and the such...and if possible think of a broader term to include rivers lakes and oceans. --Alan del Beccio 06:26, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC) Earth sub-categories Earth transportation *What about Category:Earth transportation for roads, subways, etc.? - Adm. Enzo Aquarius 02:09, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC) *I think we might need a Category:Transportation first, followed by some definitions. --Alan del Beccio 02:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC) Earth Regions * We needs to do something about all the states, provinces, etc, listed on Earth regions. Making Category:Earth regions would seem best, except that in accordance to how we have created other earth subcategories this name does not fit with the ^Category:Regions. I created the list titled Subnational_entities, which it the proper name in this case, it seems to me we might start with Category:Subnational entities and sub it with Category:Earth subnational entities. --Alan del Beccio 02:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC) Suggested categories Starfleet I'd like to add a category for Starfleet subdivisions like Unit XY-75847. Perhaps Category:Starfleet, but that might have the tendency to overlap with too many other categories. Category:Military units might work too. Any other suggestions? -- Harry 15:29, 31 Jan 2005 (CET) :I definitely prefer the second suggestion - "Starfleet" would be too broad as a category title, and the second one would allow us to also list units and groups of other powers (if those exist). I don't have any suggestions regarding the exact title, but it should cover, for example, Star Fleet Battle Group Omega and the Starfleet Fleets. -- Cid Highwind 11:25, 21 Feb 2005 (GMT) :On the tree suggestion page, I started the Category:Organizations -- it contains Category:Governments and Category:Agencies -- the latter should contain Category:Starfleet if and when it is created. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk * It would be a good place to add subcategories Category:Starfleet personnel, and that is with me not knowing if they are subcategorized anywhere else other than "Lists". --Alan del Beccio 06:50, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC) *I believe it should either be Category:Military units or something like Category:Fleets. In any case, I support the idea. --From Andoria with Love 12:12, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC) Specific Military Personnel Similar to the various personnel categories, I'd like to offer these suggestions: * Category:Bajoran Militia personnel, based off of the page Bajoran Militia personnel, subcategory of Category:Bajorans (and I guess Category:Ferengi). * Category:Klingon Defense Force personnel, based off of the page Klingon Defense Force personnel, subcategory of Category:Klingons. * Category:Romulan military personnel, would be based off of a Romulan military personnel page, subcategory of Category:Romulans. * Category:Central Command personnel, would be based off of a Central Command personnel page, subcategory of Category:Cardassians. * Category:Ferengi military personnel, would be based off of a Ferengi military personnel page, subcategory of Category:Ferengi. * Category:Vulcan High Command personnel/Category:Vulcan military personnel, would be based off of a page listing Vulcan military personnel, subcategory of Category:Vulcans. * Category:MACO personnel, based off of the page MACO personnel. * Category:USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-A) personnel, based off of the page USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-A) personnel, subcategory of Category:Starfleet personnel. * Category:Val Jean personnel, based off of the page Val Jean personnel, subcategory of Category:Maquis personnel. * Category:USS Equinox personnel, based off of the page USS Equinox personnel, subcategory of Category:Starfleet personnel. * Category:Starfleet Headquarters personnel/Category:Starfleet Command personnel, based off of the page Starfleet Headquarters personnel, subcategory of Category:Starfleet personnel. * Category:Starfleet Academy personnel, based off of the page Starfleet Academy personnel, subcategory of Category:Starfleet personnel. It should be included for militaries with at least 10 personnel, and probably a good number of separate civilians to make weeding out different from duplication.--Tim Thomason 01:50, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC) (updated Tim Thomason 12:48, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)) * For the moment, I'm definately for Category:Klingon Defense Force personnel and suggest perhaps changing Category:Cardassian Orders personnel to something more like Category:Central Command personnel (a la Category:Starfleet personnel). --Alan del Beccio 04:54, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC) * I agree and support the ones Gvsualan mentioned above (though I personally think a simpler and more generic Category:Cardassian military personnel sounds more appropriate). I also strongly support Category:Bajoran Militia personnel andCategory:Romulan military personnel. I'll offer mild support for the Category:Ferengi military personnel, Category:Vulcan High Command personnel/Category:Vulcan military personnel, and Category:MACO personnel. I'll have to see how many Enterprise-A personnel were actually mentioned before I take a side on Category:USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-A) personnel. :I think I might have to oppose Category:Val Jean personnel since it's a bit redundant with both the Voyager and Maquis personnel categories and also Category:USS Equinox personnel since I don't really think there's people enough to warrant one. I also oppose Category:Starfleet Command personnel (a bit too vague, I think). I also oppose Category:Starfleet Academy personnel because either this only includes instructors, teachers, etc., in which case there's probably too few, or it also includes cadets, in which case EVERY OFFCER, presumably having once been a cadet, should theoretically be included, making it far too broad.--T smitts 22:56, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC) :: Actually when I made this list of personnel pages, I searched through all the pages with "personnel" and only included those with over 10 members. I understand the redundancy of Category:Val Jean personnel and the vagueness of Category:Starfleet Command personnel. Starfleet Academy personnel would be based on the list here, and contains 24 named people (more than Category:Andorians and Category:Bolians, and there has always been a tendency to mention "Professor Smith taught me this well..."). Also USS Equinox personnel has 13 named people, which seems alright to me as a nice, small category in which the members aren't categorized elsewhere.--Tim Thomason 03:17, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Based on the somewhat agreeable responce to variations of these I went ahead and created Category:Klingon Defence Force personnel, but after reevaluating this, I think the simplest way to do this is to simply define it as "military" and go with: Category:Klingon military personnel, Category:Romulan military personnel, Category:Cardassian military personnel and Category:Bajoran military personnel (or Category:Bajoran Militia personnel -- for some reason I can't envision Rom as being part of the "military", but maybe he is?). I also support Category:Starfleet Academy personnel. --Alan del Beccio 11:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC) Political regions I was thinking something like Category:Political regions for all political regions, including nations, states, provinces and districts (anything that doesn't fall under Category:Cities or Category:Regions) that can further be subcategorized into those specifically referenced on Earth. --Alan del Beccio 05:36, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Support, although I'm not sure if "political regions" is really the best name for it. Then again, I can't think of anything better, so maybe it is the best name for it. :-P --From Andoria with Love 19:36, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Support --FuturamaGuy 22:15, 3 Nov 2005 (UTC) Borg Category:Borg for those listed on the list of Borg. --Alan del Beccio 17:07, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC) :I agree with the category, but its name ("Borg") might better be used for a category for everything of "Borg origin". We normally use plural for list categories, which isn't possible here. Any other suggestions? -- Cid Highwind 18:35, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC) * The name agrees, in terms of naming, with the already existing singular category names such as Category:Trill, Category:Ferengi and Category:Jem'Hadar. --Alan del Beccio 19:04, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Strong Support. The name is sound, as is the category. And it's about darn time our Borg pals got a little recognition around here, too. :-P Resistance is, like, futile, and stuff. --From Andoria with Love 19:36, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Support, but I'd like to see maybe "Borg" for everything regarding the Borg, and then "Cat: Borg drones" for the actual borg people. - AJHalliwell 20:35, 8 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Strong support. Ben Sisqo 00:27, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC) Military personnel Category:Military personnel which would contain all non-Starfleet personnel who were in their respective governments military (like most Romulans and Klingons). Starfleet personnel and maybe the Guls categories could be sub-categories and if and when other types of personnel are made into categories (as suggested above), they can be separated and made sub-categories.--Tim Thomason 08:21, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) * I think this is a better start than the long winded "Specific Military Personnel" selection listed above. --FuturamaGuy 22:17, 3 Nov 2005 (UTC) ** Comment: I can't believe someone thought that the whole "Specific Military Personnel" was a good idea.--Tim Thomason 07:29, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC) * Support. Sounds good. Make it so. --From Andoria with Love 05:08, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC) Occupations * In reviewing many of the terms categorized under Category:Titles, I've noticed that many of those listed are (almost) strictly occupations, rather than mere titles. Examples of this include: Archaeology and anthropology officer, astronaut, bartender, Captain's personal guard, Comfort woman, etc -- versus more traditional (and true) titles, such as King, Ambassador, High Commissioner and the like. --Alan del Beccio 08:39, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC) *'Comment': Under titles I see (or saw) three different types: ##'Military ranks', like Colonel or Lieutenant, now a category thanks to some courageous individuals. ##'Titles', real titles given to someones name, like Administrator, Governor or Jal. ##'Positions', not really given to your name but an "occupation" you occupy with some authority (like Arbiter of Succession, Records officer, Science officer, Third officer, Captain's personal guard) ##'Occupations', like you suggest which includes bartender or barkeep or maybe Chef (although that is also a title) or even astronaut. * I'm not really suggesting these sub-categories, I'm just saying that "occupations" doesn't really cover it either.--Tim Thomason 15:46, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC) ** Well I'm out of here again for a few days, so I'm not sure what we can do with this, as you have a point about the divisions of this--and at the same time, I really don't think it is appropriate, as it is currently, to have bartender and comfort woman categorized as "titles"-- in fact, I would almost rather see them not categorized at all. I suggest we browse through wikipedia's category structure for ideas. A significantly toned down version of what might be found in might be a good start. --Alan del Beccio 00:35, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC) From Ten Forward I've got a category suggestion, I know there's a place for such things, but I forget where it is, feel free to move this. I'd like to see Species Unknown or something with the same meaning in order to compile the characters whose species are unknown, rather then creating pages for each one. I'm refering to the list that is starting to form under By Individual at Unnamed humanoids. Jaf 23:57, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC) :Is this the same as that suggestion for "unnamed nonhumans" below? Otherwise, could you be a little more specific about its possible content and name? -- Cid Highwind 12:25, 5 February 2006 (UTC) Kazon I created this last night when I was half asleep and somehow remembered to add the provisional notice without even mentioning it here. However, I doubt people will argue with its existence? The only thing that might be contentious is whether to include only Kazon people or everything related to the Kazon -- given their (relatively) brief tenure, I'd say the latter. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 18:41, 26 Nov 2005 (UTC) :This category should be for everything of Kazon origin -- probably a decent quantity of articles from their two year tenure as characters. A people list would be Category:Kazons i believe, if thats the proper plural, but how many Kazon did we really end up seeing -- 10-20? if its more than 15 or so named individuals this would make a decent subcategory. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 12:47, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC) * I oppose this being about "everything of Kazon origin". Also, we have numerous categories that are not plural (ending with "s" -- as "the Kazon" is plural) for people, such as Category:Ferengi and Category:Jem'Hadar, which are not about "everything of" those respective species. --Alan del Beccio 20:26, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC) Federation Members Category:Federation Members Self-explanatory, though I really can't decide if this should apply to species, planets, or both.--T smitts 17:26, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC) * Support: First of all, I would change the name to Category:Federation members, to conform to our capitalization standards. Then I would use the list at Federation members (a list of Planets) and use the Founding, Council, Other known, and Probable members sections of that page (about 33 member planets, from Aaamazzara to Zaran II). I wouldn't use anything else from that page, but we might have to categorize some species (Zaldans, Medusans, Saurians, Napeans) whose planet is unknown, or we could make a bunch of "Zaldan Homeworld" etc. pages and categorize them as Federation members.--Tim Thomason 00:08, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC) *'Oppose', for the moment: The question whether this applies to species, planets or both is one that we already discussed about two years ago, probably on the talk page of the "Federation members" page - and although my opinion of this has changed a little since then, I still don't think there's a definite answer either way. If we can't even decide (based on canon info) if we should include one or the other, we probably shouldn't start a category. And if we do anyway, we should only include definite members, not the proabble ones. -- Cid Highwind 21:09, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC) *How about two categories: Category:Federation planets and Category:Federation species? I would support that. --From Andoria with Love 20:56, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC) Chemical Compounds There are quite a number of chemical compounds (including drugs), both real and fictional, mentioned in various episodes. I think a Category:Chemical compounds might be helpful to organize these, many of which are not currently categorized at all. Renegade54 22:04, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC) * Sure, why not. Support. --From Andoria with Love 21:04, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC) * Support (after all, it was my suggestion!) -- Renegade54 14:12, 30 January 2006 (UTC) **Can we go ahead and get this category created now? If not, what do we still need? -- Renegade54 19:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC) * Because that only touchs on a small part of a larger whole. See the suggestions below for Category:Materials. --Alan del Beccio 19:26, 13 February 2006 (UTC) ** And also because there really isn't an existing list to create it from. --Alan del Beccio 20:06, 13 February 2006 (UTC) Category:Memory Alpha images (11-7-05) This is a supercategory suggestion -- the top level for a category tree to sort images. I suggest using a basic "sort by series" approach -- identify each image as the production it came from -- with the naming convention Category:XXX images should it be "TOS images" or "TOS Season 1 images" (as the entire series would probably encompass a few hundred images, and all images should be cited with a season or episode reference) *Category:TOS images (supercategory, no articles) ** Category:TOS Season 1 images, TOS s2, etc. * Etc.. for each series TNG, DS9, ... *Category:Novels covers; Comics, etc ("covers" because we generally don't reproduce anything besides a cover of a publication so as to avoid an infringement). Additionally, any part of our existing category tree is open to having an "XXX images" category associated with it (and contained within it), once we discuss the details for how to classify the images (how much of a planet need be shown or described in an image to classify it into Category:Planet images, the sort key used, etc... -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 18:41, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Suggestions As discussed on Ten Forward, I think image categories will be very useful in cataloguing what we currently have and also preventing the duplication of images. In addition to Captainmike's suggestions regarding season, series, novels, etc. I also recommend categories for characters, which could be structured something like this: *Category:Starfleet personnel images **Category:USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) personnel images ***Category:Jean-Luc Picard images (create only for characters which have a large number of images) For ships, maybe something like this: *Category:Federation ship images **Category:Galaxy class images (can include exteriors and interiors) ***Category:USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) images (again, only for ships which have a large number of images) Or for planets: *Category:Planet images **Category:Alpha and Beta Quadrant planet images ***Category:Earth images Clearly, many other areas can be categorized in such a fashion... perhaps a notice can be added to the upload page asking archivists to search and check image categories before uploading a new file. I think this will go a long way towards helping us make better use of pics. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 19:36, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC) :I think image categories only make sense to catalogue images for possible reuse. Memory Alpha is not an image gallery, so our categorization doesn't need to behave like a photo album. Instead, we can concentrate on optimizing this category structure for editors. I don't know if something like SERIES images or STARSHIP personnel images makes sense in that case. For character images, for example, I would suggest to start with something like: :*'People' :**'Single' :***'Headshot' :**'Groups' :Other "top categories" could be: :*'Location' (with possible subcategories "Indoor", "Outdoor" or more specific "Ten Forward" etc.) :*'Scene' (possible subcategories: "Fight", "Discussion", "Leisure" etc.) :*'Object' (with possible subcategories "Starships", "Planets", "Weapons", even "People" could be a subcategory of this) :-- Cid Highwind 18:44, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC) :I suggest to create the suggested Category:Memory Alpha images now and use a bot to add that link to all images we have. We can then continue the discussion about useful subcategories. -- Cid Highwind 17:01, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC) ::The sub categories we have in MA/de are "book covers", "computer games", "indoor", "starships", "starbases", "stellar objects", "persons" (though that might be subdivided in Meta-Trek) of course I would offer Morn's help, just tell me. -- Kobi - [[ :Kobi|( )]] 17:22, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC) ::There's now also "place" I've noticed. These categories can be very useful if your're searching for images for illustration, I was satisfied that I could use it "for the uniform". --Memory 11:18, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC) *'Archived' --Alan del Beccio 08:11, 7 Nov 2005 (UTC) Revived I think the MA/de categries are a good example of where to go with this -- we might want to address whether or not to name this with a standard (Category:XX images, Category:Images of XX, etc.) -- for example, all categories solely for images could get contained in super category Category:Memory Alpha image categories I support creation of Category:Memory Alpha image categories, Category:Images of book covers and propose discussion of naming requirements for more (i don't feel Memory Alpha:Images of computer games is logically named, for example, so we'd need to work on a better translation -- or it might make more sense to use Memory Alpha:Book cover images and Memory Alpha:Video game images. Please discuss and suggest. Barring any other objections, I also think super-super-category Category:Memory Alpha images could be added to all images as Cid suggested. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 03:55, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC) :As these are maintenance categories I still maintain that all future subcategories for images should be prefixed with "Memory Alpha" (though without a ":" after that, we don't use that in other cases). I also think we don't need another category acting as a supercategory to these - the already created Category:Memory Alpha images should suffice. Finally, let me clarify my earlier suggestion. I don't think we should have all images categorized as Memory Alpha images indefinitely - what I meant was to categorize them there first, then move them to more appropriate categories as we create them. I think a double categorization as an "image" and as an "XYZ image" doesn't make sense, and would oppose that suggestion. ---- The rest of this discussion dealt with categories for various ''cover images. It has been moved to Category talk:Memory Alpha images (covers). Continue the discussion about that part of the category tree there. Suggest further image categories below.'' -- Cid Highwind 21:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC) ---- Suggestion: Sort keys should not be used when categorizing images. First, I don't even know if those really work - but second, and more important: We still want to have images with useful name (which is, being named like the article about the main object in the image). Once we have an image category working, it will be much easier to detect and correct wrong image filenames. -- Cid Highwind 21:53, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Individuals Category:Memory Alpha images (individuals) - for all images showing just one person, no groups etc. We have many of those; this category could later be subdivided into several, according to species, affiliation or something. (Note:Only in-universe characters, not actors etc.) -- Cid Highwind 23:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC) I now created this category to move a great deal of images out of the way (=from the main category). This might later become a subcategory of a generic "people" category or something, if necessary. -- Cid Highwind 11:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC) * I supppose since you've already taken the liberty to start this I will add my support vote to the list. --Alan del Beccio 11:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC) Insignia Category:Memory Alpha images (insignia) - for all detail images of various insignia, mission patches etc. without further context. Both screenshots and user-created drawings. -- Cid Highwind 11:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC) Planets Category:Memory Alpha images (planets) - for all images mainly showing a planet from orbit. May contain an orbiting starship or similar, but the planet should be the main focus of the image. -- Cid Highwind 11:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC) Further (covers) subcategories *Category:Memory Alpha images (biography covers) *Category:Memory Alpha images (comic book covers) -- Cid Highwind 16:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC) Display graphics *Category:Memory Alpha images (display graphics)... unless someone can find a better title. For all images of okudagrams and other display graphics, such as: Image:VoyagerAstroLabMilkyWay.jpg, Image:Academy flight trainer.jpg etc. -- Cid Highwind 20:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC) Starships *This is almost a given but Category:Memory Alpha images (starships)? --Alan del Beccio 17:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC) Inhabited Star systems? I was looking at the star systems page earlier and it's a constantly growing page with no sub-divisions. I was wondering whether a sub-category might be appropriate for Inhabited star systems. It would list only those systems which were stated or seen to be inhabited by a known lifeform. Any system only mentioned, but not mentioned as inhabited, or any system seen but not shown to be inhabited would reside in the main category. Just seems like it would be a good way to break up the length of hte category in a helpful manner with an easy distinction. --Logan 5 01:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC) :It is usually easiest to establish a category from a reference list of some sort. Is there such a list on the site? --Alan del Beccio 02:08, 30 January 2006 (UTC) ::I think we had a lengthy discussion while trying to determine exactly which planets were inhabited and which weren't some time ago - so I'd like to see a list first, too, to see if this really works. -- Cid Highwind 20:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC) Well, there's this list: Inhabited planets which would def. be a start. It's incomplete but any planet on this list would obviously have its parent system included. Logan 5 21:44, 1 February 2006 (UTC) :So wouldnt it be easier to go with Category:Inhabited planets? --Alan del Beccio 05:21, 2 February 2006 (UTC) :::My vote is for Category:Inhabited planets as well. It's more specific, and gives a finer level of detail than one for inhabited star systems. -- Renegade54 15:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC) ::First, this isn't an either/or question. We might want to decide to split up the star systems category, the planets category, both or neither. If the question here is whether to split up one category, working on the other won't help at all. Going back to just the star systems category, I have to ask: Will splitting up this category really help? It has about 230 entries now, which isn't too much, and the proposed split still seems rather artificial to me - any system that was being mentioned as "inhabited" might have a striving population of billions, or just some dozen scientists on a space station in the middle of nowhere. Any other system, too, might in fact be uninhabited, or have a population that was just not mentioned. Regarding this, I don't know if a split is really worth all that, considering that we would necessarily destroy a reference page for all star systems in the process (this would also be true for the planets category, of course). Why not have categories for the generic type and list articles for any subset of that? -- Cid Highwind 15:57, 4 February 2006 (UTC) Unnamed nonhumans Subcategory for all the "List of"'s that are kept within Category:Nonhumans, much like were created the subcategory Category:Unnamed Humans for Category:Humans. --Alan del Beccio 00:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Maneuvers Category:Maneuvers based on the list Maneuvers and tactics. --Alan del Beccio 07:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Category:Materials Based on materials. The use of this category name is also the chosen name on Wikipedia, which essentially defines the same things we are attempting to define here. --Alan del Beccio 14:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC) :Support - and as discussed, could be used to collect further subcategories such as "Explosives" later. -- Cid Highwind 14:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC) Novel series I'm not familiar enough with the way the novels are laid out, but similar to the TV series category (if we have one), this would be for the "big picture" articles that contain the list of novels. Possibly even subcategories for individual novel series if there are enough of them to justify a new category. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 07:44, 6 February 2006 (UTC) "Real" characters I've created this production category on MA-fr to list all historical figures which really existed or still exist in "our" world (authors, musicians, rulers, scientist...) to distinguish them from other fictionnal characters : Bach, Berlioz, Bizet, Blair, Bradbury, Brahms, Brezhnev, Clemens, Crockett, daVinci, Dickens, Einstein, Fermat, Galilei, Gutenberg, Hawkins, Hitler, Hugo, Keats, Lenine, London, Mozart, Napoléon, Newton, Nietzsche, Pasteur, Poe, Presley, Richelieu, Shaekespeare, Sinatra, Spinoza, Verne, Wonder, Presidents of the USA... and many others - Philoust123 14:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC) *'Mildly oppose' -- I'm not sure I see the need for this meta-category. I think the fewer meta-categories the better as that distracts from the focus of this collaboration...creating a "in-universe" encyclopedia. --Alan del Beccio 17:16, 11 February 2006 (UTC) Category:XX family ;Category:Picard family, Category:Raymond family *Any family of related persons that contains more than 10-20 members or so. There are now a plethora of Picards and Raymonds derived from various sources, they are often difficult to search because not all of them use the family surname. In the future, a continued categorization along these lines could help to sort out those that don't use surnames at all (like the Category:Duras family, should there be enough of them.) -- Captain M.K. Barteltalk 18:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC) * Support. However, I'm not sure with our ahem *new* canon policy that our list of the members of the Picard family will significantly decrease having not come from an acceptable reference. --Alan del Beccio 01:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC) Time I think we need a cat for time, for Months, and different types of time keeping. Starship classification Category:Starship classifications based on Starship classification. By themselves they are too broad to be included in Category:Starship classes because they themselves include several classes of starship. This would most likely be a supercategory for starship classes. --Alan del Beccio 10:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)